Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from John Heppell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 21 April 2009. It occurred during Legislative debate on Canterbury City Council Bill, Leeds City Council Bill, Nottingham City Council Bill and Reading Borough Council Bill.


Canterbury City Council Bill, Leeds City Council Bill, Nottingham City Council Bill and Reading Borough Council Bill

I shall be very brief. The hon. Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope) referred to the fact that the sponsors are not speaking for these Bills. May I make the point, so that it is on the record, that all the Nottingham MPs are here tonight to vote for the Nottingham City Council Bill and the other Bills covered by the motion? We have not spoken because the hon. Gentleman's machinations have meant, as we know, that to speak could do harm to the Bill. I shall say no more and hope that other Members will be as brief as I have been. The Bill was a good Bill when it started. The machinations of the hon. Member for Christchurch have not made it a bad Bill. The will of the House is that the Bill should be passed and I hope that it will be passed, along with the other three Bills. Question put. The House divided: Ayes 183, Noes 8.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
491 c203-4 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Canterbury City Council Licensing Leeds Local government Nottingham Nottingham City Council Reading Borough Council Reading (Berkshire) Touting Street trading Leeds City Council Canterbury
Legislation
Canterbury City Council Bill 2007-08 to 2012-13
Leeds City Council Bill 2007-08 to 2012-13
Nottingham City Council Bill 2007-08 to 2012-13
Reading Borough Council Bill 2007-08 to 2012-13
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk